![]() I'd say the biggest lack is tracking but people can use CoreMelt for that. CineMatch (a shot-matching plugin) will be available for FCP soon: There are several high-end FCP plugins which do certain non-color finishing tasks such as Neat Video, Imagenomic Portraiture and Digital Anarchy Flicker Free.įCP now has built-in hue/sat curves, HSL masks and good HDR support. I'm not sure what the "market penetration" of those is among the FCP user community. Is this a pain point? And is it worth developing a product for FCP?Īs Ben said, there are various 3rd-party color grading plugins for FCP right now. I'm really interested to find out if there are a lot of Final Cut users who find color grading challenging or who would like the color correction component of their workflow to be easier. E.g, Neat Video, Digital Anarchy's Flicker Free, Imagenomic Portraiture, etc. GPU) for certain tasks, but FCP also requires that if using similar capability via plugins. ![]() Resolve can require significant hardware (esp. However EditReady2 can batch transcode both of those to ProRes 4444. Resolve can directly handle BRAW but not ProRes RAW FCP is the opposite. It can work but the entire workflow must be mapped out ahead of time and all post production collaborators must be trained. ![]() If the initial editor avoids certain things that don't translate well to Resolve, that can work.īut if the timeline requires editing in Resolve then goes back to FCP, then back again to Resolve, it becomes more complex. In a formal, sequential post-production workflow, you achieve "edit lock" and hand off to color and audio. The question is do you need that vs what a skilled colorist can accomplish with FCP, and is it worth the time and coordination overhead to have a dual NLE workflow. The color masking features are more nuanced than FCP, and the node-based color system allows elaborate grading. The quality of those is similar to the best available expensive 3rd party products like Neat Video and Imagenomic Portraiture. Resolve Studio has excellent tracking, stabilization, skin refinement and noise reduction all built in. This will theoretically be improved in the future as plugins are re-written to use FxPlug 4. Plugins as currently implemented using the FxPlug 3 framework may degrade FCP reliability in some cases. There are also various plugins like Color Finale and CoreMelt which expand that but in a collaborative workflow can cause issues since everyone must have that plugin. ![]() I have corrected and graded a lot of material using only FCP and am also testing Resolve for the finishing stage of FCP editing.Īs Ben said you can do a lot with FCP's native tools. Are there any FCP users that are color grading using FCP and also color grading using Da Vinci Resolve? I would really like to hear your thoughts on advantages / disadvantages of both, thanks! ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |